Democracy, in the shortest form is defined as "Government by the people". In the first sight it looks very nice, as if "people together" will judge and assess, which government is good and ultimately the best one is chosen. This might be the case, long ago. But does it work the same way today?
So actually, calling it "Government by the people", it sounds confusing. It should be rightly called as "Government by majority people", which it really means, how it works.
Today in a practical world, where people race each other in every field, social status, money, sex and business etc, by hook or by crook, "government by the people" is hardly the case. People are always present in there own interest groups, and want to force it on other groups. Or vice versa there are groups that want to defend themselves from the offensive groups. So in real sense, there are lobbies everywhere, having a tug of war. The lobbies may be corrupt or innocent. But if in majority, democracy allows them to government.
So in real sense, democracy is the government by people in majority. This majority does not always mean a group that thinks in favour of humanity or benefit of nation/state/town etc. They may be the people who intentionally, keep manipulating the meaning of democracy, and find loop holes to grab more and more.
How is this problem solved by democracy? Doesn't democracy fail in this case? (I know, there are other entities, like judiciary, media, freedom to speak up etc that form the pillars. But everything seems failing, since the constituents of all these entities, are formed by people ultimately. And people themselves have formed up lobbies to win the race.
The aim of a right system must be a government, let's say, chosen by people, who think the human way (no matter majority or minority). Just focusing upon, who is majority? Does that solve problems?